The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration’s basic idea for cross-strait interaction is the so-called “1992 consensus” and getting each side of the Taiwan Strait to abstain from denying the existence of the other. There was some understanding for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) not agreeing to these premises and goals, but anyone who could or would be willing to understand the Ma administration’s actions is totally confused.
The administration considers it reasonable to remain silent or protest in a low-key manner when President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is referred to as “Mr” by China or when Beijing calls the Republic of China (ROC) the “Taiwan Area,” but harshly refutes any statements that Taiwan is a province or a part of China. But in what way is it respectful to the presidency and the ROC when Ma says that he is comfortable being referred to as “Mr Ma” and when he refers to Taiwan as an “area?”
Apart from terrifying the DPP, Ma has probably made the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) happy beyond its wildest dreams. How could this be construed as mutual non-denial? It is outright self-denial!
Ma’s handling of other matters has also left the public stunned and speechless. His administration was “pragmatic” to the point of humiliating Taiwan in seeking admission to the UN’s specialized organizations. When Chinese Ambassador to the UN Wang Guangya (王光亞) rejected Taiwan’s entrance, Taipei should have issued a strong protest. The Presidential Office spokesperson, however, spoke up for China as if he was the spokesperson for Beijing’s UN delegation.
Then there was Ma’s backtracking on national defense. Taiwan has cruise missiles with a reach of 500km to 600km, capable of attacking military facilities along the Fujian coast. We were about to make a breakthrough in the development of the Hsiung Feng 2E cruise missile, which would have reached of 800km to 1,000km, and would allow Taiwan to hit second-line military facilities such as airports.
A reasonable military strategy would dictate that development of these missiles be completed. If substantial military concessions are made between China and Taiwan, we could consider maintaining existing capability but forego mass production and deployment. However, considering China’s rapid increases in national defense spending, research and development and expanding deployments, the Ma administration had no reason to stop the Hsiung Feng 2E program. The Chinese probably didn’t believe their ears. Unfortunately for Taiwan, it was all too true.
When the DPP was in power, the national strategy was to maintain a clear definition of Taiwanese sovereignty and to state that there was one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait. This was in line with mainstream public opinion. However, this strategy caused a freeze in cross-strait relations and hurt relations between the pan-green and pan-blue camps as well as between China, the US and Taiwan.
The Ma administration has a different strategy and maybe they cannot be blamed for making the change given eight years of chilly relations. However, the government has gone directly against Taiwan’s sovereign interests and mainstream public opinion.
Simply put, the former Chen administration was characterized by a clear stance, but its overly hasty policies and rash actions hurt Taiwan’s interests and the feelings of the public.
Ma, however, has severely damaged Taiwan’s sovereignty, its fundamental interests and planted the seeds for long-term mistrust. The only way to resolve these problems is by kicking Ma out of office!
Lee Wen-chung is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
The war between Israel and Iran offers far-reaching strategic lessons, not only for the Middle East, but also for East Asia, particularly Taiwan. As tensions rise across both regions, the behavior of global powers, especially the US under the US President Donald Trump, signals how alliances, deterrence and rapid military mobilization could shape the outcomes of future conflicts. For Taiwan, facing increasing pressure and aggression from China, these lessons are both urgent and actionable. One of the most notable features of the Israel-Iran war was the prompt and decisive intervention of the US. Although the Trump administration is often portrayed as
RSS